The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Lisa’s LP ‘Lifeboat’ Bid?

Posted on | September 8, 2010 | 41 Comments

In the comments of yesterday’s post about Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s continuing push for the Alaska Libertarian Party nomination, commenter “Carl” offered a theory that libertarian blogger Thomas Knapp finds sensible:

What she’s looking for is a lifeboat — a nice, lucrative job as a corporate lobbyist, VP of a “defense” contractor firm, something like that that keeps her well-paid and down south.
The bluff — aimed at the Republican establishment higher-ups who can summon that kind of lifeboat for her with a few words in the right ears — is “hook me up or I hand this seat to the Democrats.”

To quote Allahpundit, “Hmmmmm.” But I’m invoking Occam’s Razor here and sticking with the simplest explanation: Murkowski is just another D.C. power-junkie addicted to having a bunch of staffers who call her “Senator” as they jump to satisfy her every whim.

“She doesn’t want to give up power, even though she lost,” as Dan Riehl says. That’s your Single Bullet Theory, and any speculation beyond that takes you into Grassy Knoll territory.

Meanwhile, Sean Cockerham of the Anchorage Daily News reports:

For Murkowski to run as a Libertarian, [LP Senate candidate] Haase would have to step aside and the party would need to reverse its vote barring her from the ticket.
“It would be a serious flip-flop,” party chairman [Scott] Kohlhaas said. “And I don’t think it’s happening.” . . .
Haase said Murkowski does have Libertarian tendencies but that her support for the war on drugs is a problem.

Maybe Lisa could talk to 2008 LP presidential candidate Bob Barr about the drug issue. Bob used to be hardcore against drugs when he was a Republican, but has mellowed out as a Libertarian. Not quite Cheech and Chong, but no longer Sgt. Stadanko.

As I noted yesterday, Murkowski isn’t the only Republican talking to the LP. Bill Walker, who placed third in the GOP gubernatorial primary (challenging Gov. Sean Parnell), reached out to the Libertarians after being turned down by the Alaska Independence Party. 

Pattie Epler of Alaska Dispatch points out that these party-switch shenanigans can’t last much longer:

Still, time is running short. The current candidates would have to write a letter to the state Division of Elections withdrawing their names and the party would have to agree to substitute the new candidates as the official nominees. And the elections office must have the new nominations by Sept. 15.

So this storyline can only continue for another week and, as Epler explains, the prospect of Murkowski attempting a write-in candidacy is remote. The practical effect of the continuing shenanigans at this point is to give the media an excuse to ignore the guy who actually won the Republican nomination.

JOE MILLER for U.S. SENATE

Category: Alaska, Election, Joe Miller, Senate

Comments

41 Responses to “Lisa’s LP ‘Lifeboat’ Bid?”

  1. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 9:01 am

    Stacy,

    I’ll take your Occam’s Razor and raise you one.

    The theory that Murkowski is eyeballing the LP line because she wants to remain a Senator requires two major assumptions — and they’re both very unsafe assumptions.

    The first assumption is that she can get the LP line. While it’s not completely impossible, she’s already been told no once. And if there really is “Ron Paul involvement,” that involvement is almost certainly of the “sent someone up there to beg them not to do it” variety (Paul is very much a GOP team player — even to the point of allowing letters begging registered Libertarian voters in California to support big-government GOP congressional incumbents instead of their LP opponents to go out over his signature in 2000).

    The second assumption is that she can win if she runs on the LP line.

    The only poll I’ve seen that says any such thing was a small-sample poll, for which I’ve seen no demographic crosstabs or actual question texts, commissioned by the guy behind the whole “why don’t you run on the LP line?” thing. And even if that poll is accurate, it’s only accurate for “if the election were held today.”

    The election isn’t being held today. It’s being held almost two months from today. Two months is a long time in any race, and it’s e-fucking-ternity in this one.

    Miller beat Murkowski — barely, but he beat her — when she was the well-funded incumbent and he was the penniless upstart. You’ve seen — hell, you’ve helped foment — what the Tea Party can do fundraisingwise when it gets riled up. Do you think the Tea Party won’t be riled up by the Wicked Witch they thought they melted rising again to run against their Dorothy?

    The Democrats had written this seat off. Give them a three-way race and there won’t be enough brown paper bags in Anchorage to carry the Democratic Party cash, the union cash and the Kos cash that will flow in to get a Democratic pickup in a year sure to be remembered mostly for Democratic losses.

    The only assumption required by Carl’s theory is that Murkowski wants to make bank — and that’s a pretty safe assumption of any politician on his or her way out of office.

  2. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 9:01 am

    Stacy,

    I’ll take your Occam’s Razor and raise you one.

    The theory that Murkowski is eyeballing the LP line because she wants to remain a Senator requires two major assumptions — and they’re both very unsafe assumptions.

    The first assumption is that she can get the LP line. While it’s not completely impossible, she’s already been told no once. And if there really is “Ron Paul involvement,” that involvement is almost certainly of the “sent someone up there to beg them not to do it” variety (Paul is very much a GOP team player — even to the point of allowing letters begging registered Libertarian voters in California to support big-government GOP congressional incumbents instead of their LP opponents to go out over his signature in 2000).

    The second assumption is that she can win if she runs on the LP line.

    The only poll I’ve seen that says any such thing was a small-sample poll, for which I’ve seen no demographic crosstabs or actual question texts, commissioned by the guy behind the whole “why don’t you run on the LP line?” thing. And even if that poll is accurate, it’s only accurate for “if the election were held today.”

    The election isn’t being held today. It’s being held almost two months from today. Two months is a long time in any race, and it’s e-fucking-ternity in this one.

    Miller beat Murkowski — barely, but he beat her — when she was the well-funded incumbent and he was the penniless upstart. You’ve seen — hell, you’ve helped foment — what the Tea Party can do fundraisingwise when it gets riled up. Do you think the Tea Party won’t be riled up by the Wicked Witch they thought they melted rising again to run against their Dorothy?

    The Democrats had written this seat off. Give them a three-way race and there won’t be enough brown paper bags in Anchorage to carry the Democratic Party cash, the union cash and the Kos cash that will flow in to get a Democratic pickup in a year sure to be remembered mostly for Democratic losses.

    The only assumption required by Carl’s theory is that Murkowski wants to make bank — and that’s a pretty safe assumption of any politician on his or her way out of office.

  3. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 5:01 am

    Stacy,

    I’ll take your Occam’s Razor and raise you one.

    The theory that Murkowski is eyeballing the LP line because she wants to remain a Senator requires two major assumptions — and they’re both very unsafe assumptions.

    The first assumption is that she can get the LP line. While it’s not completely impossible, she’s already been told no once. And if there really is “Ron Paul involvement,” that involvement is almost certainly of the “sent someone up there to beg them not to do it” variety (Paul is very much a GOP team player — even to the point of allowing letters begging registered Libertarian voters in California to support big-government GOP congressional incumbents instead of their LP opponents to go out over his signature in 2000).

    The second assumption is that she can win if she runs on the LP line.

    The only poll I’ve seen that says any such thing was a small-sample poll, for which I’ve seen no demographic crosstabs or actual question texts, commissioned by the guy behind the whole “why don’t you run on the LP line?” thing. And even if that poll is accurate, it’s only accurate for “if the election were held today.”

    The election isn’t being held today. It’s being held almost two months from today. Two months is a long time in any race, and it’s e-fucking-ternity in this one.

    Miller beat Murkowski — barely, but he beat her — when she was the well-funded incumbent and he was the penniless upstart. You’ve seen — hell, you’ve helped foment — what the Tea Party can do fundraisingwise when it gets riled up. Do you think the Tea Party won’t be riled up by the Wicked Witch they thought they melted rising again to run against their Dorothy?

    The Democrats had written this seat off. Give them a three-way race and there won’t be enough brown paper bags in Anchorage to carry the Democratic Party cash, the union cash and the Kos cash that will flow in to get a Democratic pickup in a year sure to be remembered mostly for Democratic losses.

    The only assumption required by Carl’s theory is that Murkowski wants to make bank — and that’s a pretty safe assumption of any politician on his or her way out of office.

  4. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 9:07 am

    And oh, by the way, pretty please with sugar on top … could you make that second link point at the post it quotes? I am a link-love slut.

  5. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 9:07 am

    And oh, by the way, pretty please with sugar on top … could you make that second link point at the post it quotes? I am a link-love slut.

  6. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 5:07 am

    And oh, by the way, pretty please with sugar on top … could you make that second link point at the post it quotes? I am a link-love slut.

  7. Robert Stacy McCain
    September 8th, 2010 @ 9:15 am

    I am a link-love slut.

    Me, too. Thanks for pointing out the HTML error. Fixed it. I agree with your point about Democrats pouring in everything they’ve got, should Murky go third-party. But I still say Murky is clinging to power, rather than grasping for money.

    Whatever she’s doing, it’s despicable.

  8. Robert Stacy McCain
    September 8th, 2010 @ 9:15 am

    I am a link-love slut.

    Me, too. Thanks for pointing out the HTML error. Fixed it. I agree with your point about Democrats pouring in everything they’ve got, should Murky go third-party. But I still say Murky is clinging to power, rather than grasping for money.

    Whatever she’s doing, it’s despicable.

  9. Robert Stacy McCain
    September 8th, 2010 @ 5:15 am

    I am a link-love slut.

    Me, too. Thanks for pointing out the HTML error. Fixed it. I agree with your point about Democrats pouring in everything they’ve got, should Murky go third-party. But I still say Murky is clinging to power, rather than grasping for money.

    Whatever she’s doing, it’s despicable.

  10. EXCLUSIVE: Lisa Murkowski Meets Personally With Alaska LP Officials UPDATE: Bitney, Halcro Behind Push : The Other McCain
    September 8th, 2010 @ 5:22 am

    […] said she respects the electorate and would support whoever wins.”UPDATE VIII: Examining the “lifeboat” theory. var addthis_append_data='false';var addthis_language='en';var addthis_options='twitter, digg, […]

  11. T.L. Davis
    September 8th, 2010 @ 10:30 am

    Incumbent Republicans across the country who lose their primaries just won’t give up the ghost. They are revealing themselves for the power junkies they are and demonstrating a serious contempt for the voter that damn well should be instructive to anyone paying attention.

  12. T.L. Davis
    September 8th, 2010 @ 10:30 am

    Incumbent Republicans across the country who lose their primaries just won’t give up the ghost. They are revealing themselves for the power junkies they are and demonstrating a serious contempt for the voter that damn well should be instructive to anyone paying attention.

  13. T.L. Davis
    September 8th, 2010 @ 6:30 am

    Incumbent Republicans across the country who lose their primaries just won’t give up the ghost. They are revealing themselves for the power junkies they are and demonstrating a serious contempt for the voter that damn well should be instructive to anyone paying attention.

  14. nathan hale
    September 8th, 2010 @ 11:16 am

    It sounds counterintuitive, but you are only worthy of authority, if you are willing to give it up, that’s one of the principles that Stephen Mansfield found in his book on Palin

  15. nathan hale
    September 8th, 2010 @ 11:16 am

    It sounds counterintuitive, but you are only worthy of authority, if you are willing to give it up, that’s one of the principles that Stephen Mansfield found in his book on Palin

  16. nathan hale
    September 8th, 2010 @ 7:16 am

    It sounds counterintuitive, but you are only worthy of authority, if you are willing to give it up, that’s one of the principles that Stephen Mansfield found in his book on Palin

  17. Estragon
    September 8th, 2010 @ 12:55 pm

    I have to agree the most sensible theory is the “I kin haz a job paying WUT?” one. Evidently the offers from lobbying firms haven’t exactly been flowing in, possibly because Murky would be waiting tables at a cheesy diner on the outskirts of Anchorage right now if her Daddy had been named Smith. And waitress wannabees aren’t exactly in short supply in DC . . .

    Mama wants to get paid if she is going to shut up and go away.

    But there is even less of a chance the LP will adopt her after having already passed, and the only alternative is a write-in campaign. Since the ratification of the 17th Amendment nearly a century ago, exactly ONE candidate has been elected to the US Senate on a write-in vote.

    That was Strom Thurmond, elected in 1954 after beloved Senator Burnet Maybank died after winning renomination unopposed. There was no Republican Party to speak of in the deep South in those days, so whoever replaced Maybank was a shoo-in for election. Party leaders met immediately after Maybank’s funeral to nominate State House Speaker Edgar Brown to replace him.

    The disrespect became an issue in the newspapers, and led to the successful Thurmond write-in campaign. Thurmond evaded accusations of party disloyalty by promising to run in an open primary at the next election, which he did.

    Murky ain’t no Strom, though.

  18. Estragon
    September 8th, 2010 @ 8:55 am

    I have to agree the most sensible theory is the “I kin haz a job paying WUT?” one. Evidently the offers from lobbying firms haven’t exactly been flowing in, possibly because Murky would be waiting tables at a cheesy diner on the outskirts of Anchorage right now if her Daddy had been named Smith. And waitress wannabees aren’t exactly in short supply in DC . . .

    Mama wants to get paid if she is going to shut up and go away.

    But there is even less of a chance the LP will adopt her after having already passed, and the only alternative is a write-in campaign. Since the ratification of the 17th Amendment nearly a century ago, exactly ONE candidate has been elected to the US Senate on a write-in vote.

    That was Strom Thurmond, elected in 1954 after beloved Senator Burnet Maybank died after winning renomination unopposed. There was no Republican Party to speak of in the deep South in those days, so whoever replaced Maybank was a shoo-in for election. Party leaders met immediately after Maybank’s funeral to nominate State House Speaker Edgar Brown to replace him.

    The disrespect became an issue in the newspapers, and led to the successful Thurmond write-in campaign. Thurmond evaded accusations of party disloyalty by promising to run in an open primary at the next election, which he did.

    Murky ain’t no Strom, though.

  19. Joe
    September 8th, 2010 @ 1:31 pm

    Lisa has a head like a hatchet. Lisa Hatchethead.

    I think she prefers Senator Lisa.

  20. Joe
    September 8th, 2010 @ 1:31 pm

    Lisa has a head like a hatchet. Lisa Hatchethead.

    I think she prefers Senator Lisa.

  21. Joe
    September 8th, 2010 @ 9:31 am

    Lisa has a head like a hatchet. Lisa Hatchethead.

    I think she prefers Senator Lisa.

  22. Mikey NTH
    September 8th, 2010 @ 3:34 pm

    If you are counting on the Libertarian Party to save your phony baloney government job you are seriously delusional.

  23. Mikey NTH
    September 8th, 2010 @ 3:34 pm

    If you are counting on the Libertarian Party to save your phony baloney government job you are seriously delusional.

  24. Mikey NTH
    September 8th, 2010 @ 11:34 am

    If you are counting on the Libertarian Party to save your phony baloney government job you are seriously delusional.

  25. JeffS
    September 8th, 2010 @ 3:41 pm

    Whatever she’s doing, it’s despicable.

    It’s part of her political dynastic hertitage. Being despicable, I mean.

  26. JeffS
    September 8th, 2010 @ 3:41 pm

    Whatever she’s doing, it’s despicable.

    It’s part of her political dynastic hertitage. Being despicable, I mean.

  27. JeffS
    September 8th, 2010 @ 11:41 am

    Whatever she’s doing, it’s despicable.

    It’s part of her political dynastic hertitage. Being despicable, I mean.

  28. Fear And Loathing 2010: With The Northern Lights A Runnin’ Wild « The Camp Of The Saints
    September 8th, 2010 @ 11:44 am

    […] disagrees in a posting published early this morning: To quote Allahpundit, “Hmmmmm.” But I’m invoking Occam’s Razor here and sticking with the […]

  29. Eric Dondero
    September 8th, 2010 @ 4:07 pm

    This is a common tactic of Tom Knapp. When he’s torn on an issue, such as this Murkowski thing, he’ll deflect to side issues, and bring up theories that really have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

    Stacy’s right. This is just a clear case of a stunned United States Senator who got beat in the primary, looking for ways to salvage her career.

  30. Eric Dondero
    September 8th, 2010 @ 4:07 pm

    This is a common tactic of Tom Knapp. When he’s torn on an issue, such as this Murkowski thing, he’ll deflect to side issues, and bring up theories that really have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

    Stacy’s right. This is just a clear case of a stunned United States Senator who got beat in the primary, looking for ways to salvage her career.

  31. Eric Dondero
    September 8th, 2010 @ 12:07 pm

    This is a common tactic of Tom Knapp. When he’s torn on an issue, such as this Murkowski thing, he’ll deflect to side issues, and bring up theories that really have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

    Stacy’s right. This is just a clear case of a stunned United States Senator who got beat in the primary, looking for ways to salvage her career.

  32. Wondering Jew
    September 8th, 2010 @ 4:28 pm

    All I know is that it is great to have all of one’s views of unprincipled RINOs validated in real-time. Even if the MSM will spin it all away as “moderates” bucking Republican “extremists”

  33. Wondering Jew
    September 8th, 2010 @ 4:28 pm

    All I know is that it is great to have all of one’s views of unprincipled RINOs validated in real-time. Even if the MSM will spin it all away as “moderates” bucking Republican “extremists”

  34. Wondering Jew
    September 8th, 2010 @ 12:28 pm

    All I know is that it is great to have all of one’s views of unprincipled RINOs validated in real-time. Even if the MSM will spin it all away as “moderates” bucking Republican “extremists”

  35. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 7:29 pm

    Eric,

    What do you mean by me being “torn on an issue?”

    I’m certainly not “torn” between Miller, Murkowski and Haase (or the Democrat, whose name I can’t even remember at the moment). I don’t give a damn which of them gets elected in November.

    I’m also not “torn” on whether or not the Alaska LP should give Murkowski their ballot line. I think it’s a really stupid idea. I’m just not exercised over it in the same way I would be if I was still involved with the LP.

  36. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 7:29 pm

    Eric,

    What do you mean by me being “torn on an issue?”

    I’m certainly not “torn” between Miller, Murkowski and Haase (or the Democrat, whose name I can’t even remember at the moment). I don’t give a damn which of them gets elected in November.

    I’m also not “torn” on whether or not the Alaska LP should give Murkowski their ballot line. I think it’s a really stupid idea. I’m just not exercised over it in the same way I would be if I was still involved with the LP.

  37. Thomas L. Knapp
    September 8th, 2010 @ 3:29 pm

    Eric,

    What do you mean by me being “torn on an issue?”

    I’m certainly not “torn” between Miller, Murkowski and Haase (or the Democrat, whose name I can’t even remember at the moment). I don’t give a damn which of them gets elected in November.

    I’m also not “torn” on whether or not the Alaska LP should give Murkowski their ballot line. I think it’s a really stupid idea. I’m just not exercised over it in the same way I would be if I was still involved with the LP.

  38. unseen
    September 8th, 2010 @ 8:00 pm

    The practical effect of the continuing shenanigans at this point is to give the media an excuse to ignore the guy who actually won the Republican nomination.

    Yes that is part of it. A part of it also is the left’s desire to defeat Palin somehow someway.

    her victories just make their heads explode and make no mistake Joe Miller’s victory reflects well on Palin.

  39. unseen
    September 8th, 2010 @ 8:00 pm

    The practical effect of the continuing shenanigans at this point is to give the media an excuse to ignore the guy who actually won the Republican nomination.

    Yes that is part of it. A part of it also is the left’s desire to defeat Palin somehow someway.

    her victories just make their heads explode and make no mistake Joe Miller’s victory reflects well on Palin.

  40. unseen
    September 8th, 2010 @ 4:00 pm

    The practical effect of the continuing shenanigans at this point is to give the media an excuse to ignore the guy who actually won the Republican nomination.

    Yes that is part of it. A part of it also is the left’s desire to defeat Palin somehow someway.

    her victories just make their heads explode and make no mistake Joe Miller’s victory reflects well on Palin.

  41. Page not found : The Other McCain
    September 8th, 2010 @ 8:06 pm

    […] In Four Go To One In Five? Obligatory Charlie Crist TV Ad For the First Time Ever, Rush is Wrong Lisa’s LP ‘Lifeboat’ Bid? Texas Burning EXCLUSIVE: Lisa Murkowski Meets Personally With Alaska LP Officials UPDATE: Bitney, […]